Featured Why Are Sinners Told to “Seek the Lord”?

Note two errors by sbg.
1) He views God as a door to door salesman offering a free gift. The Bible never presents God this way.
2) He gives no heed to his verses, failing to note that Isaiah was to go and tell "this people" (a very particular people).

Rejecting election and God's Sovereign right to rule and choose, sbg is reduced to questioning God. As long as his heart is hardened against the supremacy of God, there will be no quit in his fight.

 

@SavedByGrace

Perhaps this has been shown in the posts, I don't recall.

A problem that many have in presenting the offer to "Israel" of the OT and that of the NT resolves to how one must consider God's instructions.
To the Jews, repentance, salvation, and right standing was aligned with the devotion to the temple and the festivals and sacrifices of being a "good Jew." Even in this day, that standard is held in many of the more conservative synagogues.

So, when the call goes out to the people of Israel from the Lord as seen in the OP, it has a different contextual understanding that that call in the NT. For recall the Lord telling the woman that the day would come when true worship can occur anywhere (my paraphrasing). However, the power and authority of the temple remained until the cross. And the residual effects impact even the messianic Jews of this day.

The atonement had a far more reaching purpose than just humanity. For John was given to write that it involved the whole Kosmos, not anthropos.

That said, I do not have the same view that you have, nor do I have the same view as the hard line Calvinist thinking, for I look at the OT atonement system and can find room to hold the following principles in which I think the NT also supports.

1) The blood of our Lord was shed for all sin of the Kosmos. Just as the sprinkling of blood was satisfactory for all in the borders of Israel, gentile, slave, visitor, believer, unbeliever, ...
2) The death (the result of Christ baring the sin) and the resurrection only benefit believers. The Scriptures clearly teach that the believer by passes death and is taken from the ceasing of the physical estate into that of the new creation estate while the unbelievers remain at death under the wrath of God.
3) The salvation is granted by God's unmerited favor according to His plan and with the understanding that such salvation comes with terms of service. That is no one is redeemed and then not given a responsibility by the Father.​

While the OT and current Jews continue to look to a temple (synagogue) for salvation and being right with God and are driven to again construct and gather for such a Temple, the Scriptures present a new covenant. One based upon the finished work of Christ.

You have ask a very good question. And you can see that, though the posts have all made very good points, there is that element that I share here on this post that needs to be taken into consideration when looking to OT presentations of the offer of salvation. The Jewish covenant was and is still held in trust by the Jews until the time of the Gentiles shall be complete and then they (Jews) will look upon Him who they pierced and mourn. They will have had the 120,000 witnesses and the two righteous in which the killed all. They will come to an understanding that they were wrong.


Now I will quietly slip back and watch.

 

It is not silly. You have clearly shown animosity toward anything related to reformed theology. The ones that you don't, Calvin for example, you only agree with them on some things because you take them out of context.

 

Duckie, you may need to clarify your post.
1) If a person needs to hear before they are accountable, then not telling anyone about Christ would keep them from God condemning them.
2) It assumes all humans are sinless from birth on upward until they hear the gospel.

I point you to Paul's magnum opus on justification by faith, found from Romans 1 through Romans 11. Paul's argument in these chapters is that all men are guilty, regardless of hearing the gospel or not. In chapter 1, Paul tells us that we can know God exists from the creation alone, but all humans will exchange worshipping the creator for worshipping the created. Thus, by this alone, all humans are guilty. The argument continues and Paul anticipates every argument against him by bringing up the question one might ask and then answering that objection to his point. Since I cannot quote the whole thing, I simply encourage you to read and study Paul's argument. In so doing, I think you will see your question answered.

 

Welcome aboard the BB, Duckie. By any chance are you from the little island of Wales, Scotland, and England in which some members of the BB minister?

You will find the verses you allude to in the OT law concerning one who accidentally takes another person's life... At least if I recall correctly it is.

However, Romans one and John one specify that everyone is given light. How they react to that light is what makes the difference and why repentance is so very important.

I view repentance as a result and companion to (inseparable) salvation where SBG (if I recall) considers it needful to gain salvation. It is really not that big an issue UNLESS one is considering repentance as a work to gain and not the result of a core change (new birth) brought by the work of the Holy Spirit.

Ultimately, all have sinned. That results in all being condemned. God did not cause the sin, nor did He have to condemn them. The payment (results) of sin is physical death. All die, for all have sinned.

The presentation in John 3 is that those that believe pass from death to eternal life. That is the transition from this life to the next with no interruption. However, those that don't believe are already condemned.

Again, welcome to the BB. Be strong in the Lord and the Power of His might, for the debates can wilt you or edify you.

 

YES, but that allows for them to stand up for the faith doesn't it?

The person tells the other person, they already do not deny the son, but the person who rejects the gift regardless of whether or not he was previously accountable, if he denies the son, he will be denied before the father.

Adam and Eve received knowledge of good and evil when they ate from the fruit, so much that they covered their nakedness with leaves and hid. So they knew they were doing evil.

After that blood is the atonement for sins, and then Jesus comes as the ultimate sacrifice and their guilt is removed.


I haven't had a chance to piece this all together yet.

I feel like I am working on one of those 12,000 piece 3D clock puzzles.




I wish I could find that verse. I believe it was actually in the NT, but since I can't find it and I am in a rush to head out, I better zip my mouth about it for now.

Thank you!

No, sorry. I am American.

 

Yes, this is true. However, in the parable of the father and two sons, the father tells both to get busy in the family business of working in the field. One says, "Sure Dad. I'll do it." But he doesn't show up to work. The other son says, "Me! Work in the field! No way!" But then after a short time changes his mind and shows up for work. The Christ asks the audience, "Who then obeyed the father?"

The point I am making is that just because a person seems to present rejection or even belief does not result in the production of evidence of salvation. Only those who do the work of the Father are redeemed. James (the brother of the Lord) wrote concerning this principle.

You are doing well with your thoughts, and If I may I would like you to consider a few additional items.

Eve, the Scriptures teach was tricked into taking the fruit; however, Adam knowing full well the consequences chose to rebel and ate. This is why the sin nature comes from the father and also why the Lord Jesus came in the flesh without an earthly father.

The Lord providing a lamb for both sacrifice and clothing is a type repeated elsewhere in Scripture. It is significant because not only was the blood shed, but He clothed them. For the believer, the blood was shed, and we are clothed in His righteousness.

Well, good for you!

Howdy from the country called Texas. Where tall tales are taller, and ....

Reminds me of the story of the Texan who rode .
.
.
.

I forgot.

 

The justice of God does not need to be applied for they are already condemned. (John 3)

How does this work out as shown in Scriptures?

We see this when the scene of the final judgement is shown in the Rev. The folks are judged concerning what they did in the life they lived (whether it was good or bad and the motives). There was no condemnation at that point just a measurement of deeds done as "recorded in the books." Then a search of the name of that person in the book of life. There is no mention of judgement, for it is the fate of those whose names were not found were cast into the lake of fire as already condemned. The Law brings the condemnation. The Holy Spirit bring to every person conviction of sin and righteousness. This is why the Calvinists can rightly hold to the need for effectual grace that brings that one who has no ability into the Father/son relationship.

Therefore, the thinking that God has some vindictive Spirit towards the unrighteous is only (imo) as it relates to the treatment the unrighteous have given the righteous. His wrath is seen not poured out upon the righteous, but the unrighteous. But such wrath is not for sin (for all sin was dealt with by the blood), but for the ungodliness shown toward His own. It is in this manner that I depart from many who hold to God having to punish the Son as discussed in another thread.

In the Scriptures, the word death consistently means physical death, with one exception. The mention of the "second death" found in Revelation 20 and 21. As far as I remember every other place it pertains to the physical death. Remember, it is after the physical death that one is judged as explained in the above paragraph(s).

Trust this helps.

 

Indeed, I disagree with the red section in your comments. If you were correct then any place where there are no believers, those pagans would have no worries. The universal atonement would justify them. Moreso, your position creates a scenario where God's atonement would be thwarted by human works.

 

Are you forgetting that it isn't sin that condemns, but the lack of belief? (John3)

By Universal Atonement you seem to be lumping the death, burial, and resurrection in with the blood sheddings.

I do not.

The blood was for all. The word God gave John (3) was Kosmos - it is all creation not just humanity. Anthropos is the word for humanity.

The whole of Christ's ministry focused upon the redemption of humanity, that is true, for the Scripture states that is why He came, but all the creation was impacted.

Too often folks are human focused and neglect that Paul stated the things concerning the atonement in reality were in heaven and earth was but a picture. The very earth and stars responded to the atonement of Christ, but it was not universal to humankind.

For humankind have the eternal breath given to Adam - a living soul. None of the Kosmos has that attribute.

Therefore, the death, the burial, the resurrection only benefit the believer(s) and are not applied universally.

Condemnation is universal, for all have sinned. All are already condemned. And few are found in Christ.

Another point came to my mind I think needs to be shared concerning your post.

When examining the Exodus account of the skulking about death angel obliged to pass by those who were behind doors with blood, one wonders if that means those were all saved in the sense of redeemed?

The answer of course is yes, in a manner of speaking they were, yet they were not in reality, for applied blood was conformity, and not core change of individuals. This is demonstrated over and over as God educated the Israeli folks.

The same is with the blood of Christ. It is for all sin. Yet, not all do conform to belief, for just as Israel, it is not in the heart.

 

I am unsure how John 3 makes any point that it isn't sin that condemns.
Romans 3:21-26
But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Romans 6:20-23
For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

It is God who gives the elect their free Inheritance as a gift to his children. Our belief is precisely because God caused us to believe. Jesus death was particular to the Israel of God. This is why the Passover foreshadows Jesus death as the Lamb of God. Jesus not only is the Lamb, but Hebrews tells us that He is the High Priest who sprinkles His blood onto us and thereby cleanses us once and for all.
As the High Priest, he does not sprinkle the world with his blood. He only sprinkles His people. The world (Egypt) dies in unatoned sin.

 

I like this and I am going to have to add it to my thoughts to think about. . .

Also Howdy to you, too, or as we say in the PNW, "whhatttupppp!"